Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Petersburgers’ Response to Terrorist Act Frightens Moscow as Much as the Act Itself, Ingrian Activist Says

Paul
Goble

Staunton, April 11 – In the wake of
the April 3 terrorist attack in their city, residents of St. Petersburg acted
on their own like members of a developed civil society, a sharp contrast to the
way Muscovites did when terrorism hit their city and a development one
regionalist writer says that frightened the Kremlin as much as the terrorist
act itself.

In a commentary on the AfterEmpire
portal, Dmitry Vitushkin, a leader of the Ingria movement, points out that
“already in the very first hours after the tragedy, Petersburgers displayed
their special character. Taxi drivers too people home for free, and
psychologists offered assistance pro bono as well (afterempire.info/2017/04/10/ingria-after/).

By those and other
actions taken independently and without orders from above, the regionalist
writer says, Petersburgers stood in sharp contrast to Muscovites who behaved
entirely differently. Taxi drivers raised their rates, and no one rushed to
help until directed to do so by the authorities.

To be sure, Vitushkin says, the city
authorities in St. Petersburg responded in a good way as well, “but much more
important is the fact that in this critical situation, the Petersburgers
themselves, without any directive from above organized things themselves.” And
they honored the victims on their own schedule, the night before Moscow told
Russians to.

“This ability to self-organize and
the capacity for mutual assistance in developed countries is called civil
society, although Muscovite public discourse [in Russia] has made this term
almost a curse,” the regionalist says.And
Petersburgers showed their mettle in another way too: they remained calm, thus
denying the terrorists a victory.

Most residents of St. Petersburg, of
course, don’t know much about the idea of Ingria let alone support it. But what
they do support is remarkably congruent with the Ingrian movement principles of
freedom and security.And opposition
demonstrations that reflect these values attract more people there than do
those which don’t.

The powers, especially those in
Moscow, “don’t like regionalists,” in St. Petersburg or anywhere else,
Vitushkin says, “not only because [regionalists] criticize them … and call for
a new federative agreement on a voluntary basis but also because the Kremlin in
principle doesn’t accept any initiative ‘from below.’”

And for that reason, the regionalist
author and activist says, one can say with certainty that “the reaction of
Petersburgers to the terrorist attack scared people in Moscow more than the act
itself.”The Petersburgers acted calmly
and quietly “without waiting for decisions from above and without glancing at
the powers.”

“In a democratic state,” Vitushkin
concludes, “the government authorities would only be glad that people
demonstrate such independence. But in an authoritarian regime where the powers
treat their subjects like small children, activism of this kind can elicit only
fear among those in power.”

That is because if those in power
look closely, they will see evidence in the reaction of Petersburgers to the
terrorist incident that “’the children’ have long ago grown up.”There is no place for those who want to
continue to act as if they hadn’t.